Performance Issues And The Future
noproblem
Join Date: 2010-04-11 Member: 71324Members
Join Date: 2010-04-11 Member: 71324Members
Windows 7 Professional x64
nVidia GeForce GTX 260 (driver version 260.99)
Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6800
4 GB RAM
I have been trying out the beta for the last few days and playing around with performance tweaks to try to get the best out of the game.
I do know this is the beta and I am well aware there is still a long way to go before this game is finished but I have been getting what I would consider pretty poor frame and vast performance drops which makes unplayable in heated exchanges. This isn't a complaint, merely an observation.
The following shows the various resolutions I have tested (all being 10:16 ratios) and the best, worst and average frame rates. The best framerates were exclusively seen in the ready room, the worst in fights and the average recorded wondering around the map on my own. This isn't an exact measurement, simply what I have witnessed on the fly over a set of games.
Visual Detail: Ridiculously Awful
Resolution:
1280 * 800: best: <45; worst: <5; avg.: 22~
1440 * 900: best <44; worst: <3; avg.: 20~
1680 * 1050: best: <40; worst: <2; avg.: 19~
1920 * 1200: best: <40; worst <2; avg. 18~
I am well aware that NS2 is trying to to things with lighting on a scale that other engines aren't even considering but is it really going to seriously tax a card that only just came out around 2 years ago?
Are their any variables values which I can alter through the console to tweak performance that I can try out to improve the game play (similarly to Quake 3 back in the day)? Is there anything else that will help (like Windows 7 settings)?
Basically what I am asking is NS2 trying to tell me that my card has aged badly and I should seriously consider purchasing a new card (or god forbid, a new PC), or we I expect performance improvements in the future that will see the frame rate increase to what I would consider playable, which would be a stable 30 FPS or better (50~60 FPS)?
By the way, when the game is smooth and there is a decent group of players it is awesome!
Edit: Changed my card type to a GTX 260 (previously 200), thanks TheLord for pointing that out.
nVidia GeForce GTX 260 (driver version 260.99)
Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6800
4 GB RAM
I have been trying out the beta for the last few days and playing around with performance tweaks to try to get the best out of the game.
I do know this is the beta and I am well aware there is still a long way to go before this game is finished but I have been getting what I would consider pretty poor frame and vast performance drops which makes unplayable in heated exchanges. This isn't a complaint, merely an observation.
The following shows the various resolutions I have tested (all being 10:16 ratios) and the best, worst and average frame rates. The best framerates were exclusively seen in the ready room, the worst in fights and the average recorded wondering around the map on my own. This isn't an exact measurement, simply what I have witnessed on the fly over a set of games.
Visual Detail: Ridiculously Awful
Resolution:
1280 * 800: best: <45; worst: <5; avg.: 22~
1440 * 900: best <44; worst: <3; avg.: 20~
1680 * 1050: best: <40; worst: <2; avg.: 19~
1920 * 1200: best: <40; worst <2; avg. 18~
I am well aware that NS2 is trying to to things with lighting on a scale that other engines aren't even considering but is it really going to seriously tax a card that only just came out around 2 years ago?
Are their any variables values which I can alter through the console to tweak performance that I can try out to improve the game play (similarly to Quake 3 back in the day)? Is there anything else that will help (like Windows 7 settings)?
Basically what I am asking is NS2 trying to tell me that my card has aged badly and I should seriously consider purchasing a new card (or god forbid, a new PC), or we I expect performance improvements in the future that will see the frame rate increase to what I would consider playable, which would be a stable 30 FPS or better (50~60 FPS)?
By the way, when the game is smooth and there is a decent group of players it is awesome!
Edit: Changed my card type to a GTX 260 (previously 200), thanks TheLord for pointing that out.
Comments
I believe the gfx card isn't used to its fullest potential after all, just look at the minimal frame gains from tuning down the resolution - should be much more.
No, there isn't much you can do right now, just wait for patches.
Oh and theres no such card called "nVidia GeForce GTX 200" - get gpu-z, that will tell you what gfx card you are using.
nVidia GeForce GTX 200 is just the general name of pretty much every card nvidia released 2008.
nVidia GeForce GTX 200 (driver version 260.99)
Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6800
4 GB RAM
[...]
Basically what I am asking is NS2 trying to tell me that my card has aged badly and I should seriously consider purchasing a new card (or god forbid, a new PC)?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yep. 2 years is about the life expectancy for a GPU or CPU (1 year if you're crazy rich). Your graphics card in particular simply will not work. NS2 is a modern game. Those things need modern cards.
Your GPU is quite bad. The 2008 release date makes me cringe. We're getting into 2011 now. It's time and past time to replace your graphics card if you want to run new games at 60 FPS.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->or we I expect performance improvements in the future that will see the frame rate increase to what I would consider playable, which would be a stable 30 FPS or better (50~60 FPS)?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Performance improvements are certain to come, but NS2 won't suddenly become Goldeneye in terms of performance requirements. You <i>might</i> get 30 FPS with that computer, but I doubt it.. You will never get 60 FPS or above.
I just bought a gtx260 3 month ago and overclocked it from 576MHz to 700MHz while undervolting it at the same time - with these clocks its just as good as a gtx 285 or a gtx460 non-overclocked.
So, no, age isn't a good reason to dump a gfx card - gfx cards in general didn't evolve THAT much after 2008... Have a look at the new hd6970, its performance gain of about 13% over the 14 month older hd5870 is a joke.
If he has a gts250 or worse on the other hand - yes that would be a reason to upgrade - eventhough the gts250 is younger in terms of age compared to the gtx260/275 ...
edit: Oh btw, my 2-years-old gfx card can run Crysis with more fps that NS2... ;)
I'm very sure UWE isn't trying to make NS2 require more gfx power than Crysis in the end (That would be a very stupid thing to do...).
Its just a question of optimization.
Else NS2 will fail in terms of sales.
Your GPU is quite bad. The 2008 release date makes me cring<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
DX9 anyone?
UWE have been pretty adamant about making NS2 playable on older hardware.
Wow what a stupid reply. The 460 was released like what.. 6-8 months ago. You realise if the game was not suitable for this card, NS2's target demographic would be about 14 people. The 4 series are all very powerful cards, and much more intensive games run well on that series, saying it won't cut it at or after release is probably the most stupid thing you could say.
NS2 might fail in sales and Unknown Worlds Entertainment might fail to optimize. Remember, they are making an entirely new engine with a small development staff and small funds. That is an enormous statement so I'll repeat again because some people seem to have forgotten about this gargantuan undertaking. Unknown Worlds Entertainment is a small development team <i>making their new engine from scratch</i> with limited funding. Failure to optimize is an unwelcome possibility, but a possibility nonetheless. Everything is against NS2 coming out and being awesome except for the talent and determination of the amazing developers working insane hours to make sure it does come out and is awesome.
So :) currently the game is absolutely not GPU bound. It is cpu bound.
A 460 works perfectly fine, i have one and get 60-70 fps.
I even get like 20 fps with a geforce 140M which is really bad, but i have a 2.5 Ghz cpu with that computer.
So, in short:
Currently the game is not multithreaded, which means it depends on the raw speed of a single core of your cpu, in short, the higher the clock speed, the better.
For the GPU, what mainly counts is the memory it has, it seems like any gpu currently under 1GB memory has issues, but they can be resolved with the graphics settings.
IF you have a gpu with much memory, the lowest and highest graphics settings will perform nearly the same.
As soon as the engine will become multithreaded and the gpu will be used more we will be able to tell more.
Currently on an AMD Phenom II X3 with 8GB ram, and usually have around 30 FPS in the game. I have gtx460 btw.
The reason why i get this poor performance is probably the CPU. I get 120-200 FPS in games like Darkfall which is also made by a small team(started by 5 norwegians around 2001). They had a different approach where they wanted smooth gameplay(meaning high fps), "others can have shiny".
Its a very different game than NS2, but i wish the UW developers(and maybe especially the mappers) would focus more on performance, and perhaps reduce the level of detail somewhat. Although i like lots of cool details, its killing the performance. I cant remember to have seen many multiplayer maps with this level of detail. There will probably be more options to turn off various effects closer to release.
What. You are joking right? GTX 460 is a fantastic card. I get 40-60FPS in NS2 right now with mine.
Your GPU is quite bad. The 2008 release date makes me cringe. We're getting into 2011 now. It's time and past time to replace your graphics card if you want to run new games at 60 FPS.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Excuse me?
I've on a 8800gts (bought 2007, released actually in 2006) and i can run the game.... not well ok, the framerate is not optimal but it doesn't really depend on the GPU much. As Asraniel said, the CPU is currently the bottleneck. I get the same fps rate when seeing a lot of models and action going on and when just staring at a wall in a little room... this can't really be my GPU's fault
So :) currently the game is absolutely not GPU bound. It is cpu bound.
A 460 works perfectly fine, i have one and get 60-70 fps.
I even get like 20 fps with a geforce 140M which is really bad, but i have a 2.5 Ghz cpu with that computer.
So, in short:
Currently the game is not multithreaded, which means it depends on the raw speed of a single core of your cpu, in short, the higher the clock speed, the better.
For the GPU, what mainly counts is the memory it has, it seems like any gpu currently under 1GB memory has issues, but they can be resolved with the graphics settings.
IF you have a gpu with much memory, the lowest and highest graphics settings will perform nearly the same.
As soon as the engine will become multithreaded and the gpu will be used more we will be able to tell more.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Makes complete sense now, thanks! I'll wait to see what gains can be made by UW. Thanks to everyone else for their input too.
No, from a marketing standpoint 2 years ago is pretty much what any modern game should be aiming to be very solidly playable on at least medium settings. The average gamer doesn't replace their parts so often.
You guys have to understand that the demographic of avid posters on a gaming forum (i.e., you guys) is not the core demographic of the average gamer that any sane company is aiming to please. So, I'm sorry, but UWE does need to maintain reasonable support of older hardware. That's just the way it is.
You also have to keep in mind that console gaming hardware hasn't changed in a very long time, and most developers prefer to make games that they can at least leave the door open for a console port on. Thus, they're necessarily limited by the hardware of current-generation consoles.
point is: game is currently <b>CPU LIMITED</b>
no amount of graphics card will change the framerate, not quad-6970 or triple-gtx580
i can imagine your gtx260 is used 60-70%..
try OC:ing the CPU 10, 20, 25, 30% - it's an extreme afterall :)
(and be careful ofc)
also, which i7?
So :) currently the game is absolutely not GPU bound. It is cpu bound.
A 460 works perfectly fine, i have one and get 60-70 fps.
I even get like 20 fps with a geforce 140M which is really bad, but i have a 2.5 Ghz cpu with that computer.
So, in short:
Currently the game is not multithreaded, which means it depends on the raw speed of a single core of your cpu, in short, the higher the clock speed, the better.
For the GPU, what mainly counts is the memory it has, it seems like any gpu currently under 1GB memory has issues, but they can be resolved with the graphics settings.
IF you have a gpu with much memory, the lowest and highest graphics settings will perform nearly the same.
As soon as the engine will become multithreaded and the gpu will be used more we will be able to tell more.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well, holy ###### I take everything back.
Tram however freezes the game up, presumably loading new areas as it usually happens rounding a corner.
The framerate is quite unstable also, but so is the game, so that's not surprising.
All my other games run fine on it so I would expect NS2 to run well on it as well. Certainly I would require a game like NS2 to run at 60ish FPS constantly, even if I have to turn the graphics down some, simply because it's hard to play a game like NS2 without a smooth framerate.
So :) currently the game is absolutely not GPU bound. It is cpu bound.
A 460 works perfectly fine, i have one and get 60-70 fps.
I even get like 20 fps with a geforce 140M which is really bad, but i have a 2.5 Ghz cpu with that computer.
So, in short:
Currently the game is not multithreaded, which means it depends on the raw speed of a single core of your cpu, in short, the higher the clock speed, the better.
For the GPU, what mainly counts is the memory it has, it seems like any gpu currently under 1GB memory has issues, but they can be resolved with the graphics settings.
IF you have a gpu with much memory, the lowest and highest graphics settings will perform nearly the same.
As soon as the engine will become multithreaded and the gpu will be used more we will be able to tell more.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I don't think this is quite true. I recall seeing Max putting in some multithreaded rendering operations quite awhile ago. The engine may not be completely thread-optimized, but I'm quite sure it's already taking advantage of multithreading to some extent.
I'm not sure the bottleneck is the CPU. I can't say since I haven't run a profiler on it, and I doubt you can say this for certain either. All we can say for certain is that the game is currently not completely optimized, so performance WILL continue to improve.
Please don't follow this advice unless you've done your homework on overclocking.
I have a GTS 8800 and I can run NS2 just fine so I don't know where this is coming from.
If you were talking about running games at very high rez I'd agree with you but I can play NS on super low detail just fine and even medium detail. Heck I turned it up on high one day and my play session was okay.
Other popular engines like UE3, Source and IW engine runs far better because they have been developed by big studios with many ppl working on it and are based on previous versions of those engines, which means they are not totally made from scratch.
It's obvious that if ns2 would have been developed under Source engine it wouldn't have had so many fps/lag problems, but on the other hand, they haven't to pay license cost and could sell their own licenses if they manage to create a competitive engine.
Is everyone who is running the game decently running a 64 bit OS?